that's what everybody else does. barney frank, though, wild card, which is why everybody loves him. here is how massachusetts governor deval patrick reacted to that rather surprising development just a couple of hours later. >> would you have preferred that he not go public? >> well, would i have preferred. does it matter in the case of congressman frank what i would have preferred. i have treated those conversations as confidential. and i think in every other case the person has treated them as confidential. and in congressman frank's case, he has chosen not to on his end. i'm going to keep my end. >> it is probably true that deval patrick has had the conversation about the senate seat with a bunch of people. but barney frank is just going on tv and talking about it and saying that he wants the job. really, nobody does it that way. the serving massachusetts senator john kerry of course has been nominated to replace hillary clinton at state.

we learned this week he is starting to prep for confirmation hearings. he was at the state department all day wednesday. the staff there now say they expect him to start reporting to the department regularly. they say they're now working with the foreign relations committee to pick a date for his confirmation hearings. should he be confirmed, what happens to mr. kerry's senate seat is this. the massachusetts governor you see on the right side of your screen there, deval patrick will appoint somebody to fill the seat. so without any sort of political contest, that person gets to hold the senate job for a few months, until a special election will be held this spring or summer in massachusetts. now barney frank is saying that while he would like to be the interim senator for a few months, he doesn't want the permanent gig. he says he will not run in the special election when it happens. the democratic party in massachusetts, including barney frank, have now pretty much coalesced behind who they -- or coalesced around who they want their senate candidate to be for the senate seat in the special election. who they want to hold the seat long-term, right?

and it's this guy. his name is ed markey. ed markey is currently a member of the house from massachusetts. and what ed markey is doing right now to prepare for a potentially very difficult, very high stakes battle for this very high profile senate seat, a race that stand alone on the political calendar in the springtime, a race that will get a ton of national attention. what is ed markey doing now to get ready for that? he is picking a huge fight with the single most profitable industry on the face of the earth, woo-hoo! ed markey is known in washington for essentially being the sheriff of the oil industry. he is the top democrat in the house on energy issue, and he has been really confrontational with the oil industry, particularly on safety issues. at a time when lots and lots of his colleagues in congress have been quietly and happily awash in oil money. but ed markey has just been a bulldog on the oil industry over the years, particularly on public safety. during the deepwater horizon disaster in 2010, for example, it was ed markey who brought

national attention to the fact that the big oil companies, including bp, had basically just mailed it in when it came to their oil response plans. these documents that were supposed to describe in great detail exactly what they would do in the event of a disaster, ed markey hauled the oil industry's executives up to capitol hill to call them on what was really in those plans, to do this -- >> these five companies have response plans that are virtually identical. the plans cite identical response capabilities and out the identical ineffective equipment. like bp, three other companies include references to protecting walruses, which have not called the gulf of mexico home for three million years. two other plans are such dead ringers for bp's that they list a phone number for the same long dead expert.

it just it seems to me that for each of your companies, the only technology you seem to be relying upon is a xerox machine to put together your response plans. >> to the extent that ed markey is nationally famous, it is for that sort of thing. and he is now -- think about this for a second. he is now look at a hugely high profile senate race in a couple of months that depending on who he is running against, maybe scott brown, it could be a multi, multi, multimillion-dollar special election involving lots of outside cash. elizabeth warren was just officially sworn in as a u.s. senator yesterday. in her run for u.s. senate for massachusetts, she made herself the nation's most high profile opponent of what is second the most profitable industry in the nation, the banking industry. the only industry that is scarier than that in terms of the power and influence they throw around in washington is the most profitable industry on earth, the oil industry. and the most pugnacious confronter of that industry is now going for the other massachusetts senate seat. wow.

ed markey has not just been an aggressive watchdog on the oil industry at times when there are high profile spills like the deepwater horizon spill, but also when the industry has stuff going on that does not get as much national attention, like, for example, the situation we have going on right now in remote, hard-to-get-to alaska, where a shell oil rig laden with 150,000 gallons of oil and fuel has run aground in unof the most pristine, ecologically sensitive bodies of water in the country. emergency response teams have been dropped on to that rig in each of the last three days. they report that the rig is upright and stable. they say that no fuel has leaked out to the ocean yet. but this is an ongoing crisis. and the response so far from washington, led by congressman ed markey, has been swift and rather loud. congressman markey is now demanding that shell turn over whatever contingency plans they had for this rig operation. he provided a statement to us tonight in which he says that given this accident, given the

safety failures in the past, he does not support any -- he does not support issuing any new permits to drill in the arctic. yesterday more than 40 of his colleagues in the house came out and publicly called for a federal investigation into this incident. and over the course of this ongoing situation up there, the news has just gotten worse and not better for shell. shell currently has two rigs in operation in the arctic. the one on the left is the one that just ran aground off the coast. the one on the right is now as of today reportedly the subject of a criminal investigation. cbs news reporting tonight that the u.s. coast guard has opened up a criminal investigation into that shell rig as a result of, among other things, serious issues with the ship's safety management and pollution control systems. tonight shell personnel in alaska who are responding to this latest accident appear to be doing everything they can to limit press coverage of what is going on up there. a report were the anchorage daily news, which is a great paper and has been doing intensive coverage on this, the

reporter attempted to get close to the command center today for this incident, and reported that, quote, guards are stationed outside a meeting room that has been turned into a command post. they said no reporters were allowed inside and they wouldn't even let a photographer snap a quick picture or allow a reporter to glance at the sign-in sheet. this industry that has been facing pressure from washington over and over again in recent years, again with yet another one of these incidents is in full damage control. again. joining us now is jerry bailenson, editor at popular mechanics. with a no-fly zone by shell, it is impossible to get firsthand reporting from the scene. but he follows the gas and oil industries for popular mechanics. and he spent four days on board this specific shell rig in october. he is well versed in the technological challenges that a company in oil exploration and drilling in the arctic. you're looking at some of his

footage of the culex pipe desk as it passes through the beaufort sea north of alaska. you obviously know these things better than i do. it's nice to have you here. >> thank you. >> the unified command team in alaska which includes the coast guard and shell, they have put up five-mile no-fly zone, a one-mile no boat zone around this stranded rig. i tend to trust the coast guard, even if i don't trust the oil companies, but i don't know if that is overkill or that is appropriate given how much that will crimp the ability of any reporters to actually cover what is happening there. >> yeah, it's a little hard for me to second guess the coast guard, which i really love. those guys are really good, especially in alaska. their helicopters are flying around and they are putting people on and off that rig. i would assume that it's for safety, and those helicopter pilots are risking their lives every time they go out to that rig. so i would assume that they're trying to keep tourists and probably journalists away, but not so much to limit information as to limit access for safety reasons. i don't read too much into that.

>> and i don't know whether or not or not to. i'm inclined to trust the coast guard in situations like this if only purely on the basis of expertise. it is also striking to see how much shell is trying to keep this quiet, and trying to keep reporters out, and trying to keep journalism away from this, trying to downplay it. how big a risk do you think this is to this ecologically sensitive area? we're talking about 150,000 gallons of fuel and oil. >> it's a really great question. so there are two different issues, i think. one is this oil rig with this amount of fuel on board in this area. and the other one is arctic drilling. and they're really two separate things. >> yeah. >> so this is not a large amount of fuel compared to freighters that run aground a coupe of years ago or several years ago there was a freighter in the allusions that ran aground. and often those carry a lot of fuel, bunker fuel, which is very bad. it's dark, gooey, disgusting stuff, and it's terrible to get into the water. freighters and tankers also run aground pose great risk.

so i think that the kulik has run aground. we don't want any of that fuel in the water. the thing that pollutions will be looking at and regulators will be looking at is whether or not we want drilling in the arctic, which is entirely different and much bigger in my mind issue. >> and that has sort of a new pointiness to it with the prospect of ed markey not just being the top democrat in the house on this issue, and as a person who is being so willing to be confrontational with the companies on this. but potentially going into a very high profile race and joining the senate. that puts a real political edge on it. do you feel the political concerns expressed around the arctic are well informed? do you feel there is reason to have real political concern over that? >> oh, well sure. one of the things that happened this year, shell went through one mistake after another. and just had a terrible year. there was air permits that they weren't able to comply with, a containment vessel that broke in a really dramatic fashion. and a lot of shell's biggest critics were surprised shell

didn't do better this year. everyone thought they would be able to pull off drilling really smoothly. there is a lot of well informed in alaska and especially on the north slope about whether we should be drilling for oil oil in the arctic or not. shell is only the first of several companies that have leases out there, and they're kind out out in front. behind them is conocophillips, statoil and other companies. they're talking about real offshore industry which has really existed up there. that's an issue that will be a big one in the next few years. >> it's going to be continually a big one in the next few days has this situation continues to not get resolved in alaska. we hope that it will. will you come back and talk to us about this more? >> sure. there is some reason to think if kulik will be pulled off where it was grounded in the next few years. that isn't confirmed, but that's what they're hoping to do. jerry beilinson spent four days aboard the kulik in october. appreciate your time. >> thank you. lots ahead tonight, including an end to the show

tonight that is slightly epic. hold on. waking the baby. [ coughs ] [ baby crying ] ♪ [ male announcer ] robitussin® liquid formula soothes your throat on contact and the active ingredient relieves your cough. robitussin®. don't suffer the coughequences™. and his new boss told him two things -- cook what you love, and save your money. joe doesn't know it yet, but he'll work his way up from busser to waiter to chef before opening a restaurant specializing in fish and game from the great northwest. he'll start investing early, he'll find some good people to help guide him, and he'll set money aside from his first day of work to his last, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.

at legalzoom, we've created a better place to handle your legal needs. maybe you have questions about incorporating a business you'd like to start. or questions about protecting your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like to find the right attorney to help guide you along, answer any questions and offer advice. with an "a" rating from the better business bureau legalzoom helps you get personalized and affordable legal protection. in most states, a legal plan attorney is available with every personalized document to answer any questions. get started at legalzoom.com today. and now you're protected.

[ woman ] too weak. wears off. been there. tried that. ladybug body milk? no thanks. [ female announcer ] stop searching and start repairing. eucerin professional repair moisturizes while actually repairing very dry skin. it's so powerful you can skip a day... but light enough you won't want to. dermatologist recommended eucerin. the end of trial and error has arrived. try a free sample at eucerinus.com. here is something i did not see coming. the first day of the new congress was yesterday, right? and we have been saying for months that on the first day of the new congress, and only on that day, the senate could change the rules that governs that body, including maybe reforming the filibuster rule, which republicans have been using to require a super majority for pretty much everything in washington for years now.

well, that is still true. a rules change with just a majority vote to make that change, that really can only happen on the first day of the new congress. but the reason you didn't hear anything about the rules being changed yesterday on day one of the new congress is that harry reid decided to redefine what counts as day one of the new congress. he redefined the first day of the legislative session. the first day will now last until, quote, later this month. which is most likely january 22nd. it started yesterday. it goes on for a while. so you did not remember that detail wrong. it was day one starting yesterday. but so far there has not been the day one vote on filibuster changes, and that still might happen. also, while we're talking about the political and news calendar, this is tentative as yet, but chuck todd of nbc news is reporting that interested parties have been given a heads-up that hbo is likely to make his nomination for the next secretary of defense on tuesday.

maybe monday, but probably tuesday. the smart money in washington says that the nomination is going 20 be former republican senator chuck hagel. while that is the smart money in washington, it is not the only money, and it is not a sure thing. and the reasons it's not a sure thing turn out to be fascinating. that story is next. [ ryon ] eating shrimp at red lobster is a fantastic experience. 30 shrimp for $11.99. i can't imagine anything better. you're getting a ton of shrimp, and it tastes really good! [ male announcer ] hurry in to red lobster's 30 shrimp for just $11.99!

choose any two of five savory shrimp selections, like mango jalapeño shrimp and parmesan crunch shrimp. two delicious shrimp selections on one plate! all with salad and unlimited cheddar bay biscuits. 30 shrimp, just $11.99 for a limited time. wow, that's a lot of shrimp. i'm ryon stewart, i'm the ultimate shrimp lover, and i sea food differently. diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues... with three strains of good bacteria. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. get coricidin hbp. the number one pharmacist recommended cold brand designed for people with high blood pressure. and the only one i use to relieve my cold symptoms without raising my blood pressure. coricidin hbp. aww man. [ male announcer ] returns are easy with free pickup from the u.s. postal service. we'll even drop off boxes if you need them. visit usps.com pay, print, and have it picked up for free.

any time of year. ♪ nice sweater. thank you. ♪

if news tonight out of washington, nbc confirming that president obama is likely to nominate this man, nebraska republican chuck hagel to be the next secretary of defense. mr. hagel served in the u.s. senate for two terms, starting in 1997. he was considered in some ways a member of that vanishing species, the moderate republican back when it was not nearly so vanishing. senator hagel served on the intelligence committee and the foreign relations committee. after 9/11, he supported the patriot act with its sweeping new powers of surveillance. he also supported the war in iraq. at the time those were reasonably centrist positions for a republican to hold.

but a couple of years into the iraq war, senator chuck hagel came out and said that america's war in iraq was starting to look to him like the war he himself fought in as an army infantry officer. it was starting to look to him like vietnam. he said that between those two war, quote, there is a parallel emerging. a couple of months later, he laid down this gauntlet to those on his own side who had gotten all over him for questioning the iraq war. he said, quote, to question your government is not unpatriotic. to not question your government is unpatriotic. america owes its men and women in uniform a policy worthy of their sacrifices. a couple of years later when the president announced that he wanted to send another 20,000 american troops into the war in iraq, senator hagel responded the next day by saying that escalating the war in that way could become, quote, the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. because he was a republican, because he was a decorated vietnam combat veteran, because

he had originally supported the iraq war, chuck hagel became one of the highest profile iraq war critics in the country. even as a republican, he was talked about as a potential vice presidential running mate for barack obama in the '08 campaign. on the other side, it was interesting. the republican nominee that year, john mccain said that chuck hagel could have a place in a john mccain presidential administration. mitch mcconnell said at the time, quote, in two terms in the senate, chuck has earned the respect of his colleagues and risen to national prominence as a clear voice on foreign policy and national security. so through all of those years, through all of his willingness to criticize his own side on the most highly politicized issues in the country, senator chuck hagel was able to hold on to the good graces of his fellow republicans for all of those years, until now. now they say they are over him, because now republican chuck hagel is looking like the person president obama would like to put in charge of the pentagon. josh rogan at foreign policy first breaking the news on the

nomination and noting in the same breath all the republican senators that are against the nomination. john cornyn saying he can't support chuck hagel because he has a, quote, problem with israel. senator dan coates said chuck hagel has had so much disrespect for the military which is a pretty rich thing to say about a veteran. he would lack experience he would need for the job. senator mccain says his colleague barely even counts as a republican. senator mark kirk says he is, quote, concerned about mr. hagel. mr. hagel also faces opposition from the democratic side for the time back in 1998 when he opposed an ambassador nominee for being what mr. hagel described at the time openly aggressively guy, for which he finally apologized last month. there is also opposition to a lesser extent just because chuck haguele is a republican. this is not ideological opposition. it's partisan. but in the technical sense of that. why is it that democratic presidents always appoint

republicans to run the pentagon, but republican presidents never appoint democrats to do the same? why would democrats do that again? why would democrats keep underscoring that caricature that republicans are the only ones to be trusted on defense? you can see just counting on your fingers that the nomination of chuck hagel should it go through could be a whale of a fight. maybe the first really big fight of 2013. hold on there is more. [ male announcer ] the more you lose, the more you lose because for every 2 pounds you lose through diet and exercise, alli can help you lose one more by blocking some of the fat you eat. let's fight fat with alli. ♪

constipated? yeah. mm. some laxatives like dulcolax can cause cramps.

but phillips' caplets don't. they have magnesium. for effective relief of occasional constipation. thanks. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. we better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more americans into that grinder. you better be sure as you kp can be. and i want every one of us, 100 senators to look in that camera and you tell your people back home what you think. don't hide anymore, none of us. >> then senator chuck hagel, republican senator of nebraska, breaking ranks very publicly with his party and with the bush administration over the war in iraq. for a long time afterward, his republican colleagues continued to call him a dear friend and a respected public servant. but now, now that mr. hagel seems to be the likely obama administration's second term nominee for secretary of defense, his previous republican

friends seem to be changing their minds about him. joining us now is steve clements from the new america foundation. he writes at the washington note and the atlantic magazine where he is washington editor at large. hi, steve. it's nice to see you. >> great to be with you, rachel. >> what are you hearing from sources in washington and the white house and elsewhere about the likelihood that it is going to be senator hagel who gets this nomination? >> well, i talked to a couple of folks today in the white house today who said steve, the president has not yet made up his mind on who he will select, and no one has been offered the job yet, but the president is going the offer it to senator hagel. and that will happen, as chuck todd reported, on monday or tuesday. >> of all the issues that senator hagel's critics may bring up against him, which ones do you think might significantly threaten his nomination, if any? >> i think the biggest issue that he has to contend with is a very large franchise of opposition that is concerned about his views on israel and middle east issues. i think senator hagel has always stood by israel's security and israel's support, but he is also

a person who is very blunt about the point that america can't afford to make choices between one nation and it's neighbors who are vital partners to the united states. he is very blunt about that issue as he was about the iraq war. and i frankly think it's smart foreign policy. but i do think that that's where he is going to get the bulk of his opposition. >> steve, you are a guy who speaks bluntly as well. do you feel like that, the source of the criticism against him on issues of the middle east and israel, do you feel like that he has sort of refused to be politically correct in his language in the sort of gesture politics that you're supposed to make on that issue, or do you think that it is about his substantive policy beliefs and what he might be like as defense secretary? >> chuck hagel more than any other senator i have known is not someone to jump on media bandwagons. i had a talk tonight with the former chief of naval operations in israel who became the head of the friends in israel of the uso.

chuck hagel used to be head of the uso. and he had a long relationship with hagel over the years. and he approached hagel and said i hear that you're not signing on to a press statement that other senators have signed on about getting jews out of russia. and hagel sent him a letter that he had privately sent to president clinton, as well as president clinton's response, and he said the much more effective way to push my government and to push my president is to handle it this way. i have no interest in jumping in the press. he was fully supportive of the effort, but he had very little interest of playing the puff erry games in the media. what do you make of the criticism from the other side, particularly the criticism that democratic presidents, in some cases have almost reflexively chosen republicans to run the defense department. and republicans are the national defense and democrats are not. >> leon panetta is secretary of

defense now and he has put himself between bob gates and chuck hagel. but the second thing, and i mean this as no negative. this are very qualified, competent people in the democratic party who are more than competent to run the department of defense. that said, the democrats, many of them that came in with president obama, that were also part of the concern that americans don't trust democrats to deploy power, to be forceful in the world have adopted in many of the institutions they have built in the last four to five to six years a pentagon-hugging strategy of not wanting to reform or cut because of the fear that they will be considered vietnam democrats, anti-military democrats. so to send in a republican in an era of austerity to slash budgets and to basically send a message that at the end of this, we're going to apply intelligence and technology to our security platforms and come out with more security deliverables, even though we're spending less is something that i think president obama thinks a republican like chuck hagel can

do better than other candidates that are in the field. >> that's fascinating. the politics here are fascinating. i would love to get blunt assessments of how they're viewing those politics in washington, and we never will. but you can see them better close up. steve clemons, atlantic magazine, steve, as always, thank you. >> thanks. we have a department of corrections coming up. and if that doesn't sound epic to you, then you are the one who is wrong. [ male announcer ] where do you turn for legal matters?

at legalzoom, we've created a better place to handle your legal needs. maybe you have questions about incorporating a business you'd like to start.

no thanks. [ female announcer ] stop searching and start repairing. eucerin professional repair moisturizes while actually repairing very dry skin. it's so powerful you can skip a day... but light enough you won't want to. dermatologist recommended eucerin. the end of trial and error has arrived.

try a free sample at eucerinus.com. pop quiz. all right. the date is august 29th, 1996. what is going on in american politics on that date? okay. it's 1996, so it's an even numbered year. that means it's an election year, and '96 was a presidential election year. those were the clinton years. so right, bill clinton was president. 1996 he was running for reelection. and in late august, that would mean we're getting close to labor day, which means it's getting to be time for the conventions. august 29th, 1996. here was on that date the white house press briefing. peter knight, the national campaign manage over the clinton/gore campaign, and leon panetta, who was white house chief of staff at the time. now he is secretary of defense. but then he was bill clinton's white house chief of staff. and on this date, on august 29th, 1996 in american politics,

leon panetta was white house chief of staff. and that night his boss, bill clinton, was due to give his big speech, his speech at the democratic convention, accepting his party's nomination to be reelected president of the united states. huge day for the clinton white house, right? and on that date at the white house press briefing, seven of the first ten questions that leon panetta and company got asked by the press were not about president clinton and his big night. the press was totally distracted from that that day. the country was totally distracted from that. what was it that rained on the clinton campaign's big parade? this day, the day he should have been triumphantly starting his march to reelection, what was it? it wasn't a war breaking out, an international incident. it wasn't anything the republicans had done to derail the attention from president clinton on the most important day of his reelection campaign. what was it? it was something else that just submarined that whole moment in

presidential politics, that whole crucial day in that campaign. what was it? that's next, because it turns out it is still around now.

okay. in the last 100 years, the only democrats to have been elected president and then reelected president are fdr, bill clinton, and barack obama. that's it. there are only three of them. truman doesn't count because he doesn't get elected president for his first term. he got to be president when fdr died. so truman himself only ran for president once. same thing for lbj. he could have run for his own full second term, but he decided not to. so in the end there have been only three democrats elected to two terms in the whole last century. and of those three, we think about the clinton one. we think about the clinton reelection as having been kind of a gimme, right? because he ended up beating bob

dole by so much. but in the middle of that campaign, it did not necessarily seem linebacker it was going to be so easy. president clinton's opponent, mr. dole, had the luxury of competing for his party's nomination that year in a primary that kind of looked like bob dole and the seven dwarves, no offense to dwarves. his competitors in the early primaries that year were pablo, oh, uncle pat! steve forbes, lamar alexander, whose main campaign trope was he wore a plaid shirt everywhere. shockingly, that was enough to propel him to the nomination. so bob dole locked it up without too much work. he had national name recognition and was a truly inspiring war hero who had been wounded in world war ii. and he is a very likable guy. and heading into the election it did not seem like this young first term president bill clinton was going to be storming to a massive reelection victory over war hero bob dole.

after senator dole locked up his party's nomination, he made a surprise announcement that he was going to resign from the senate after three decades in congress in order to devote himself fully to the race for presidency. that was a really big deal. he also picked for his vp a man named jack kemp, who was really, really conservative, but who was also seen as a popular choice, an interesting choice at least in that it totally locked up the conservative base behind that ticket. it also added the whole football hero thing to the whole war hero thing on that side of the ticket. so that's what was going on on the republican side. they had a lot going their way. on the democratic side, there was some trouble. you remember whitewater? the whole whitewater sort of wild goose chase sort of scandal that was breaking open that spring and summer? the governor who took over in arkansas after bill clinton left to become president, that governor got convicted in the whitewater case. the president's business partners on the whitewater deal got not just indicted but convicted in the case. so at that time back then, bob

dole was making some smart decisions, running a pretty good campaign, and there was this long simmering scandal royaling the clinton white house. and yeah, president clinton was ahead. but it was not a sure bet in 1996. and so rolling toward that election, at the end of the summer, 1996, the nominating conventions for both sides ended up being important, and also sort of unexpectedly entertaining. >> tradition holds that this speech be delivered tomorrow night. but president clinton asked me to speak tonight. and you can probably guess the reason why. my reputation for excitement. this is some crowd. i've been watching you doing that macarena on television. and if i could have your silence, i would like to

demonstrate for you the al gore version of the macarena. [ cheering ] would you like to see it again? >> al gore's single best moment of the 1996 campaign. but the thing he referenced at the top there about the timing of his speech supposed to be tomorrow night, that ended up being really important. al gore did give his speech a night earlier than would have been normally expected based on tradition. it was the next night that bill clinton ended up giving his speech, not al gore. and overnight, in between al gore silently doing the macarena on wednesday night and everybody in washington waking up on thursday morning, overnight, that overnight the clinton campaign had a political disaster. it was the day of president clinton's acceptance speech at the democratic convention, and out of the blue, with no warning on that day that the president of the united states is due to address his party's convention to give his big acceptance

speech, on that day, this long-awaited thing and the suspenseful campaign, the crowning moment of the reelect, what happened that day to overshadow the president? what happened all of the sudden that particular crucial day? hooker scandal. >> tonight the man widely credited with bringing president clinton back from a political near death experience is gone. he has been forced from the campaign by a tabloid newspaper's claims that he had a long-standing relationship with a washington call girl that included sharing with her inside information from the white house and the first family. he is dick morris, and although he is little known to the general public in politics, he has been a very effective hired gun for republicans and democrats alike. >> that was day four of the democratic convention, the day the president gave his acceptance speech, the reelection campaign's moment in the sun. but instead of covering that as a moment in the sun, all the questions from the press that day, all the coverage of his big

speech that day had to include stuff like "clinton's day was marred by the resignation of dick morris, his chief political strategist in response to a published report that he had maintained a relationship with a $200 an hour prostitute and had let her listen in while he talked to clinton on the phone." that year when papers did tick-tocks of what happened during the course of the campaign, what they had to say than date, about august 29th, 1996 was clinton accepts democratic party nomination on the same day that his chief campaign strategist dick morris resigns amid tabloid newspaper reports of liaisons with a prostitute. that was the hartford current's tick-tock of the campaign that year. their lead editorial. what happened was this. dick morris spoils the coronation. now we think of dick morris as just this guy on fox news just this guy on fox news that is part of the conservative pundit talk, he was a really big deal. this was the cover of "time

magazine." the week after the democratic convention that year. the morris mess, how it could hurt clinton after the fall. the week before that, the previous cover, had also had dick morris on that, the man with clinton's ear. which were particularly awful allegations, after the scandal, including that he let the woman he hired for sex, let him listen in on the conversations with the president of the united states. the woman he hired, she said she decided to sell her story, and go public, because "it has to be told," wake up america, i mean, if he told me, who else did he tell? so yeah, it was week one on the cover of "time magazine." and here was week two. nice timing. it was just a blockbuster humiliating fall in the middle of the presidential campaign. and that is how dick morris

became a famous person. of course, president clinton did recover after the incident, mr. morris went on to become a conservative, and writes books about how sleazy the clintons are, "the green room" has a lot of room for information like that. that is how they came to feature dick morris, tearing a famous wide path of misprognostication. >> there is no chance he will get reelected. romney will win by a very large margin, a landslide, if you will, and we'll also win ten seats in the senate. we have a shot at not only winning in the senate. >> there is no president romney now getting ready to start his first term with his republican

super majority in the senate. but this was what fox was selling, this is what dick morris predicted would happen this election day, and this is what actually happened. a lot of people were wrong about this year's election. but dick morris was spectacularly wrong. he was so wrong, he became a touch stone for how bad the right was this year at reading the polls. and the other political basics of covering the election, but why were they so bad at it? and were they covering the polls, guys that were not just opining in favor of mitt romney winning the election, but guys who were actually working to help mr. romney win. an interesting question, is that why they were so wrong? in that context, we did a show on mr. morris's activism and in response we got this response from his lawyers, demanding a correction. and honestly our policy here on the show, anything we get wrong

on the air we are happy to correct. we are always glad to correct our mistakes. and i will, but what is weird here in the specific instance is what we did not get wrong, a these guys are nevertheless very, very upset about. check this out, okay, we're talking about a super pac here, super pac for america, a fundraising appeal from dick morris from 2010. it was posted on his website, the note outlines what he says is his plan to get republicans elected to congress in the 2010 election. in this note, he asks for donations. saying my organization, super pacusa.com, set to run until election day, we're still short of what we need to fulfill this entire mission, including opposing barney frank, so please give us a sizeable donation, as quickly as you can. we are raising almost half a million a day and we need to

keep it going. if you are moved by that and click through to donate to what dick morris calls "my organization." you get sent to the super pac for america website, this is what dick morris described as "my organization" in that 2010 note. what is weird is that the letter his lawyer sent us, insists that even though dick morris called the super m -- pac my organization, the letter says he did not organize control or make any financial decisions for super pac for america. what is weird is that the letter says mr. morris was only involved with the super pac at all, to the extent the group asked him to help out with a specific fundraising drive the help elect mitt romney as president, which mr. morris agreed to do. yeah, but dude, there he is, back in the 2010 election campaign, when mitt romney was not even running for campaign. there he is, asking for

donations, there he is using it to elect republicans to congress. this is weird, for whatever reason, dick morris is trying to distance himself from the super pac, and he demands from this letter that i help him distance himself from the super pac that he called his organization. okay, for the record i am happy to clarify that the national chairman of the organization is a man named michael reagan, and that dick morris's title is "chief strategist." he called it his organization, and if he wants to deny he called it his organization. he can take that up with the person who signs the letter, dick morris. and take it up with the donors who believed when they saw the message from dick morris, asking for money from what he described as organization, you can tell the donors that that was not really his organization. you can tell that to his donors. and that is one of the most interesting things about this whole story and saga.

it is one of the reasons we reported on this in the first place is part of a broader effort to try to understand the conservative movement, and its relationship to the media. and how the groups do or do not contribute to the republicans winning office. super pacs are designed to big donors, if you want to donate 100 bucks or more to mitt romney, it makes the most sense to give the money to see campaign directly. it is only if you want to donate 200,000 bucks or two million, more than you're allowed to donate to a campaign, it makes sense then to funnel the donations to a super pac that is not allowed to coordinate with the campaign. i mean, they're part of the mega dome for a reason, but not the case with this one. the last fec filing showed them pulling in contributions in droves. raising contributions of 200 bucks and under in the final run-up to the election.

that is why many took notice when the fec filing showed the super pac funding, where does this money go? is it really going to defeat president obama and elect mitt romney? where is it going? in the weeks leading up to the election, one of the largest expenditures of the super pac for which dick morris serves as chief strategist, went to a group, and listed it as f fundraising. we reported that, that earned us this letter, and it is true. in the last election cycle, the super pac raised just over $3 million. and they paid $1.7 million to news max for fundraising. but that money that goes to news max, does any of that money that goes to news max for advertising, ultimately come

back to dick morris enterprises, since paying dick morris for that is one of the ways he made money, we raised the prospect for what he was raising through the super pac, supposedly to defeat barack obama, was actually just being rerouted back to himself, and i use that word on the air, substantial. in truth, we do not know what proportion of the money raised by dick morris and his super pac, supposedly to defeat barack obama, was actually redirected to dick morris. nowhere does it say the money that was raised ended up going back to dick morris, either for e-mail or any other reasons. but mr. morris's lawyers confirm that news max is the broker, they confirm that the money was paid to news max. they do confirm that what some of that money was for was the donate for the mailing list. but they dispute it was a substantial portion.

i do not have evidence it was a substantial portion. so i am happy to correct that part of it. when we get stuff wrong i'm happy to make a correction. but on the rest of this stuff? no, when we don't get stuff wrong i will not take it back just because you do not like the way it sounds, even though it is true. and hey, while you don't like the sound of something, sometimes ends up being newsworthy in this case. what we learned in this case, one of the most visible pundits is trying to put distance from himself and the fundraising that he claimed from donors. why is that? and the republican party trying to find itself after bush and cheney, as they try to find themselves regarding the conservative celebrity, not just from talk radio and tv entertainers, but from the most unlikely blast from the past bold face names. turns out the most interesting thing to watch next is from the

response on the right, the people starting to question the slick tactics, already are about electing republican candidates, or whether they're about something else. and to what exact degree. now it is time for "the last word," have a good week. behind closed doors today, speaker john boehner revealed the 113th congress is not going to learn the lessons of the 112th, brace yourself for the debt ceiling debacle, part two. john boehner once again holds the speaker's gavel. only in his hands, it is weightless and makes no sound. >> the number one issue is still the economy. >> the new jobs reports shows 155,000 jobs added. >> that is about what was expected. >> things only get worse for john boehner. >> he is getting hit from all sides. >> we're standing here not to be something but to do something. >> if washington was going to do

something they had their opening. >> it is a time to rise. >> the next flight, the debt ceiling. >> i think that is frankly a dead loser. >> it is time to rise. >> we really are playing with dynamite with the debt ceiling. >> is the glass full or half empty. >> tax increases destroy jobs. >> we always assume the republicans have the leverage in the debt ceiling negotiations. >> i will not have another debate with this congress. they should pay the bills they have already racked up. >> he is the president. >> class a statesmanship. >> it is the time to rise. >> will the 113th congress be any less dysfunctional than the 112th? with the fiscal cliff or curve or slope or whatever you want to call it, i'm glad we don't have to have this debate anymore. newly -- with that behind us,